[B-Greek] Fwd: The Language of the NT
Carl Conrad
cwconrad2 at mac.com
Mon Jan 14 06:37:31 EST 2008
Over the weekend I received the following message from Professor Lars
Rydbeck, Professor of NT Philology, University of Lund, whohad taken
note of this recent topic of BG discussion. I have reformatted the
translation of his RGG article, since we do not permit appending
documents to BG messages.
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
Begin forwarded message:
> From: Lars Rydbeck <lars at rydbeck.se>
> Date: January 12, 2008 9:25:16 AM EST
> To: cwconrad2 at mac.com
> Subject: The Language of the NT
>
> Chaire,
>
> For some time I have been a subscriber to the B-Greek site.
> Unfortunately
> there are too many items every day for me to find time to read them.
> I have noticed a discussion going on about the nature of NT Greek
> and would
> like like to bring to your attention a couple of books and articles
> that I
> find useful.
>
> Adrados,Geschichte der griechischen Sprache von den Anfängen bis
> heute.
> Originally in Spanish.Very good
>
> Horrocks, Greek. A History of the Language and its Speakers.Good on
> the
> pronounciation of Greek during different periods. Not so good on NT
> Greek.
> Follows the old Deissmannian-Moultonian line.
>
> Wifstrand, Epochs and Styles. Mohr-Siebeck, WUNT 179. Many chapters
> on the
> history of late antique Greek and specifically on NT Greek. Review
> in RBL:
http://www.bookreviews.org/bookdetail.asp?TitleId=5471&CodePage=5471
or
http://tinyurl.com/29ulu7
>
> Rydbeck, article on Die Sprache des NT in Religion in Geschichte und
> Gegenwart 4th ed. sub voce Bibel. Since a few months also in English
> in the
> Brill translation of RGG 4 (RPP vol ii The Language of the NT, sub
> voce
> Bible (article follows message below).
>
> Alexander, Loveday, Acts in its Ancient Literay Context. Particularly
> Chapter 10:Septuaginta, Fachprosa, Imitatio: Albert Wifstrand and the
> Language of Luke-Acts.
>
> If the references are not full enough please get back to me.
>
> Yours
> Lars Rydbeck
> Prof. of NT Philology at the Univ. of Lund (Sweden) (Ret)
=======
Rydbeck, Eng. tr. of RGG4 ...:
3. The language of the New Testament. Scholars have taken two main
positions in their evaluation of the language of the NT. Either this
is seen as part of the development of written Greek from Alexander the
Great until the 1st century ce (Deissmann, Moulton, Wif- strand,
Rydbeck, Horsley), or else the language of the NT is unique and must
be considered an independent phenomenon outside and alongside the
usual develop- ment of the Greek language (Wellhausen: a
semiticizing Greek; Turner: a special form of Christian Greek, an ad
hoc language inspired by the Holy Spirit).
In order to speak appropriately of the language of the NT, one must
first say something about the 3000-year history of Greek. In this
history, the so-called classical Attic prose (c. 400 bce) is a late
phenomenon; but it was this uniform Attic that was adopted by the
rising super- power to the north, Macedonia, as the diplomatic lan-
guage it employed in its dealings with the Greeks. This universal
Attic was spread throughout the entire Near East thanks to the
conquering expeditions of Alexander the Great, and Attic became the
common language of the Hellenistic world, known as ἡ κοινὴ
διάλεκτος/hH KOINH DIALEKTOS (or KOINH for short); this
expression is found in a text by the Epicurean philosopher Colotes
(born c. 325 bce). – From 50 bce, the epoch of Hellenistic Greek was
increasingly replaced by the reaction of the pseudo-classical movement
in language and style, which demanded a return to the authors of the
classical period (“classicism” or “Atticism”). The consequence
of this classicistic linguistic reaction was that most of the
literature of the last three centuries bce was forgotten, and has not
survived. Thanks to the interest of Christians in the LXX, however,
the most extensive text of the Hellenistic age was preserved. Together
with the historians Polybius and Diodorus, the LXX is the most
important monument of literary KOINH, just as the NT is without doubt
the most important example of a literary
KOINH from the 1st century ce which is as yet untouched by classicism.
From the 2nd century ce onward, Atticism dominates both the pagan
linguistic development and the Greek of the first Christian theologians.
Neither the Hellenistic literary KOINH nor the artificial
Atticistic language of the imperial age is a monolithic entity. Both
contain a variety of levels of literary KOINH or of high Atticistic
prose, and in many cases we see the per- sonal variants of individual
writers. The NT was writ- ten before the Atticizing linguistic
reaction had won the day on a broad front. Atticism must be
understood as a reactionary linguistic and cultural movement; the
Hellenistic KOINH was born of a conservative linguistic and cultural
climate which did indeed build on Attic prose, but allowed the
individual writer a relatively wide free- dom of movement. This is
the explanation of the various examples of literary KOINH which have
left their mark on NT Greek: the various translation strata of the
LXX Greek, and the representatives of the so-called intertestamental
literature, especially 1 → Enoch and the → Testaments of the Twelve
Patriarchs, which influence the Greek in James, the letters of Peter,
and Hebrew.
Many influences flow into the NT. The Greek of the LXX is
particularly important for the linguistic forms of the synoptics and
Acts; for these writers, the LXX is the classic edifying text which
they quote and freely integrate into their literary composition. It
is here that the root of Luke’s classicism lies, not in the pagan
classicism of the imperial age (cf. Wifstrand, Lukas, arguing against
Norden). At least five linguistic styles can be distinguished in the
NT, which have the same basis in relation to phonology, flections,
syntax (with the exception of passages which imitate the translation-
syntax of the LXX), the formation of words, and the meanings of
words: viz., the customary literary KOINH which goes back to the
Hellenistic period. Group I: Paul. Group II: John (and the letters of
John). In linguistic and stylistic terms, Paul and John are two
unique individuals. Group III: the synoptic Gospels and Acts, a group
characterized by a septuagintal atmosphere and general semitic
influences on phraseology and the sequence of words. Group IV:
Revelation, where the author is a stylist with a mind of his own, who
deliberately deviates from normal Greek grammar. Group V: the Catholic
Epistles, Hebrews, and the Pastoral Letters. This group is distinct
from the other groups in two ways (cf. Wifstrand, Stylistic Problems):
first, their authors favor the customary Greek style of descriptive,
analytical, and paraenetic prose, rather than the style employed in
the sayings of Jesus in the Gospels or in the appeals and
argumentation of Paul. Secondly, the style of the catholic epistles
is strikingly similar to that of later Christian literature. The
apostolic and later fathers of the church write in a style which
recalls that of James and the letters of Peter. The roots of this
linguistic style lie in the edifying language of the hellenized
diaspora synagogue; this is why one could call the Greek of the
synagogue a biblical or Jewish Greek, although one must be aware that
the biblical-Jewish element is restricted exclusively to phraseology
and sentence-construction, whereas the phonology, standard forms,
normal syntax, formation of words, and most of the meanings of words
follow standard KOINH. During the imperial age, the semitic influence
on the language of Christian theologians gradually disappeared. The
influence of the LXX was restricted to allusions and direct
quotations. Nevertheless, the basic linguistic tone of the earliest
church never fell completely silent.
Standard grammar: F. Blass, A. Debrunner, & F. Rehkopf, Grammatik des
neutestamentlichen Griechisch, 1896, 171990 // G.B. Winer, Grammatik
des neutestamentlichen Sprachidioms, 1822 // J.H. Moulton, Einleitung
in die Sprache des Neuen Testaments, 1911 // J. Wellhausen,
Einleitung in die drei ersten Evangelien, 1911 // E. Norden, Die
antike Kunstprosa, 2 vols., 1915, 1918 // U. von Wilamowitz-
Moellendorff, Geschichte der griechischen Sprache, 1928 // A.
Wifstrand, Epochs and Styles, 2005 (which includes, on pp. 17–27 and
46–58, the two papers referred to in the text) // N. Turner, Syntax
(published as vol. III of J.H. Moulton, A Grammar of New Testament
Greek), 1965 // L. Rydbeck, Fachprosa, vermeintliche Volkssprache und
Neues Testament, 1967 // G.H.R. Horsley, New Documents Illustrating
Early Christianity, V: Linguistic Essays, 1989 // T. Engberg-Pedersen
et al., eds., Sproget i hellenismen, 1995 (including J. Blomqvist,
“Diglossifenomen i den hellenistiska grekiskan,” and L. Rydbeck,
“Det nytestamentliga språkets inplacering i den samtida
språkmiljön”) // G. Horrocks, Greek: A History of the Language and
its Speakers, 1997. Lars Rydbeck
========
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list